**URGENT** Deadline for Natural Resource Board Comments

19Feb

This is VERY IMPORTANT information regarding the upcoming Natural Resources Board meeting that will discuss “rules” for the “training” of dogs to be used against wolves with almost no limitations right through breeding, denning, and birthing seasons until March 31 st. The cut off to register for speaking at the meeting is TODAY, but comments will be accepted until this Friday. Here is more information:

Wisconsin Natural Resources Board
public participation guidelines

Note: the deadline to register to testify at the February 2013 Board meeting has been changed to 4 p.m. on Tuesday, February 19.

The deadline to submit a written comment for the February 2013 Board meeting is 4 p.m. on Friday, February 22.

The public is welcome to attend any Natural Resources Board (NRB or Board) meeting unless it is noticed as a closed or executive session.

The Board also provides opportunities for citizens to speak at Board meetings and to submit written comments about issues that come before the Board.

Public appearance guidelines

Public appearances mean speaking on items that are on the current Board agenda.

Public appearances cannot be made on the following:

Agenda items where the Board is being asked to authorize public hearings.

Agenda items presented for information only and on which the Board takes no action (these are typically but not always grouped under item 8, Information Items, on the agenda.

Agenda items that the Legislature has requested the Board to modify.

Public appearances are made at the time the Board considers an agenda item.

Organizations are limited to one spokesperson on an agenda item.

Each speaker has a maximum time limit of 5 minutes, and the Board Chair may set a time limit of 3 minutes. Please be prepared for either time limit.

Board members may question citizens following their presentations.

Individuals who wish to appear before the Board on complex issues are encouraged to mail or email written comments to the Board Liaison for Board members to review.

Citizen participation guidelines

Citizen participation means speaking on items that are not on the current Board agenda.

Citizen participation appearances are usually made at 1 p.m. on the day of the Board meeting.

Citizen participation is not permitted on matters that are currently in litigation.

Organizations are limited to one spokesperson on an issue.

Each speaker has a maximum time limit of 5 minutes, and the Board Chair may set a time limit of 3 minutes. Please be prepared for either time limit.

Board members may question citizens following their presentations.

The Board encourages individuals to confine their remarks to broad general policy issues rather than the day-to-day operations of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR).

Individuals who wish to appear before the Board on complex issues are encouraged to mail or email written comments to the Board Liaison for Board members to review.

Written comment guidelines

If you are commenting on a current Board agenda item, please include the following information in your comment:

Agenda item number.

Whether or not you support the item.

If your comments are lengthy, please begin with a one-paragraph summary.

Deadline and procedures to testify or submit written comments

Registration for citizen participation and public appearances must be made and written comments must be submitted to the Board Liaison no later than 4 p.m. on the Friday prior to the meeting unless otherwise noted.

When scheduling an appearance or submitting a written comment, please provide the following information:

Your name.

Name of organization(s) you represent (if none, state that you are “representing self”).

Topic or agenda item number and whether you support or oppose it.

City of residence.

Phone number.

Email or mailing address, to receive confirmation of your appearance or receive a reply to your written comment.

Email or call the Board Liaison to schedule citizen participation and public appearances before the Board. Email or mail written comments to the Board Liaison.

Here’s my letter:
Hello Laurie Ross and the NRB and DNR,
I am writing to the Board of Natural Resources. I want to address a few items broadly, and a few other items more specifically.

First of all, I am a little confused and concerned about the relationship of the NRB to the employees of the DNR. Why are elected officials making policy, legislation and laws without proper scientific support for these decisions? It seems to me that playing politics with ecosystems and natural resources is a bad precedent, though I know it has gone on for years in some states. If I could get a clear answer on how the Natural Resources Board is appointed and why it is that the state has entrusted these individuals to make policy on issues where science is vital, I would be grateful.

Secondly, I would like to voice my opposition to the use of dogs in the upcoming wolf hunt. The fact that no other state with wolf hunts allows the use of dogs speaks volumes to this issue. I also think that because of state laws preventing the killing of a wild animal, the state is on very thin ice with regards to the legality of this. There is no proper way to train dogs in this situation, and the training periods are disruptive to the already greatly reduced wolf population in the state. Morally, this amounts to little more than dog fighting which we should all deplore. Furthermore, we can only assume this will result in more dog depredations for dog owners that are not involved in wolf hunts. This is not safe for dogs, wolves, or humans and should be struck down and be made illegal. I am saddened, disappointed and embarrassed by the state for allowing this to proceed. Surely those wishing to control the wolf population could agree that this year’s hunt was successful without the use of dogs. I would please like answers to the following questions.
1) How will dogs be prevented from killing wolves if it is technically illegal to allow a dog to kill a wild animal? Does the state anticipate lawsuits, fines or arrests with regards to this?
2) Why do Wisconsin hunters or the NRB feel the need for this kind of violent clash in hunting given the success of the 2012/13 killing season?
3) How is this not likely to increase depredations on rural domestic dogs?
4) Why does the DNR remain silent on the fact that there is no proper way of training dogs for this and that the timing for training is too broad and undefined; and why is that not a greater cause for concern?
5) Please explain how this can be defended as healthy, morally necessary, wholesome or good behavior to engage in.
6) Please explain how this is a decision based on good scientific evidence and reasoning.

Most excellent post Ned. I agree whole heartedly. I’ll stand behind Mr. Gannon on all counts. I don’t understand any of the logic behind this. Please be wise and throw this out. I always thought Wisconsin was a nature loving state, am I wrong? Use dogs to hunt wolves? Oh boy, here comes another wave of animal abuse. Didn’t Michael Vick go to prison and pay a hefty fine for doing basically what you are going to be deciding upon? It’s pretty much the same thing. I’m embarrassed to be a human being and have to admit that this is even being considered.

I am contacting you regarding the plan to train and use dogs to hunt
and kill wolves. I write to you both as an animal respecting
individual and as the director of my local animal rescue organization.

While I oppose all wolf hunting on ethical grounds and upon the
understanding of the absolute necessity of natural predators in our
world’s ecosystem, the idea of using dogs to kill wolves and that
anyone could possibly come up with such an idea; much less that your
officials would consider it worthy of consideration, is deplorable.

I am sure you are aware of the shameful fact that the United States
continues its efforts to prosecute and eliminate dog fighting and yet
Wisconsin’s intent is to pit our domestic companions against our wild
ones. I suggest this would give to the public and impressionable kids
the opinion that it is acceptable to use dogs in this way. It is not.

This agenda item includes discussion of breeding and training these
unfortunate dogs to kill wolves. We already have a serious
overbreeding problem in this country, with countless dogs being killed
in shelters and pounds every day- why would you add to this? What
happens when one of these dogs ends up in a pound? What happens when
when moneyhungry people start breeding wolf killing dogs? What happens
when some dimbulb decides to try it at home and creates an aggressive
dog with heavy prey drive and it turns on a kid or adult or another
pet? Does Wisconsin want this kind of trouble and reputation on its
hands? If your board allows this ignorantly conceived plan to come to
fruition, they will be opening a whole new can of worms.

I urge you and the Wisconsin Natural Resources Board to do the only
honorable thing and reject this ill-conceived plan wholly and in its
entirety.

I WAS LOOKING OVER THE NRA WEBSITE WHEN I SAW THIS ARTICLE FROM AUGUST 2012 THAT DISCUSSES THE REVENUE THAT IS GENERATED BY THE WOLF HUNT. CHECK IT OUT:

“Wolf Tags Generate Big $$$$

The Wisconsin State Journal has reported that as of August 14, 10,025 people had applied for 2,010 wolf hunting permits.

The hunt is schedule to begin Oct. 15 and go through the end of February. The application fee is $10, so about $100,250 has already been raised and all that money will go toward the Wisconsin DNR’s wildlife conservation efforts.

Anti wolf hunting groups have filed lawsuits to stop the hunt, as has become a matter of routine in wolf management.

Ever notice how the antis always to fail to suggest how the DNR might generate all that revenue if the wolf hunt were to be stopped?

Ever see the antis volunteer to come up with that money themselves to put toward conservation?

No, never. More proof that they do not really care about wildlife. They just don’t want anybody to hunt.”

I LIKE THE PART ABOUT THE “ANTIS” NOT GENERATING REVENUE IF THE WOLF HUNT WERE STOPPED. IT MADE ME THINK THAT PERHAPS I SHOULD SUGGEST NEXT TUESDAY THAT WE “ANTIS” PONY UP SOME MONEY AND BUY OFF THE DNR. HOW ABOUT IF WE PAY DOUBLE THE $100 LICENSE FEE AND GENERATE TWICE THE REVENUE WITHOUT HUNTING WOLVES???? I KNOW I COULD RAISE TWICE THE REVENUE OF THE 2012 WOLF HUNT IN ONE MONTH OR LESS. WOULD THEY CALL OFF THE STATE SANCTIONED DOG FIGHT IF I BRING IN THE BUCKS?

wonderful letters all ivesent emails as well it they arent as eloquent as these fine letters but it was factual science based and heartfelt anytime i can help im here thanks for brining this to my attention im only to happy to help ive also spread the word the more emails the better

Thank you. I am working on mine and will post it here tomorrow. I have never seen a response like we have had here over the past 3 days. Between the story of Wiley and the hounder issue people have responded like never before. We have had over 15,000 views just since Sunday and not one negative or troll comment. We need to keep this energy going and stop the insanity running our state.

Sounds like some bloodthirsty hunters excuse for some blood and guts fun. If you use a dog to kill a wolf- that doesn’t say much about the hunters true feelings for their own animals. The dog is just another piece of property to take a life, just like a rifle or a bow and arrow. There are other ways to approach the issues. Just what kind of disgusting enviromental hater are you trying to please by allowing this? Some kind of thug lining your pockets? Don’t you have any other enviromental concerns more important to pursue than the murdering of rare wildlife by pets?

I am including our Wolf application numbers so that you are being made aware than THOUSANDS of us out here do not feel that the Gray wolf should have been removed from the protected list (did you really think there were 22,000 who wanted all the gray wolves killed?) We did this to SAVE wolves, and there should never have been a hunt mandated via legislation, and most certainly NOT with packs of hounds. We are permanent residents and have voted here for the last 7 years. We have 3 vehicles ALL had wolf plates for years contributing to the depredation fees paid by the DNR to farmers for their losses. We total many many Thousands, and are trying to wage a silent protest to SAVE the gray wolf by BUYING WOLF PERMITS in the hopes that our names were drawn for a kill tag paying the additional fee thus leaving 2 tags unfilled. You are not considering the impact of the CWD recently found in the North Western part of the state. Removing the NATURAL SELECTIVE PREDITOR OF SICK DEER is NOT the smart thing to do. This hunt should NEVER have been legislated at 3AM without the benefit of scientific and expert testimony. NO ONE should be appointed to the DNR by a politician, and that is proving to be a very bad move for the environment, wildlife, and residents of WI. The Gray wolf should be RELISTED as a protected animal. We only had 700 animals at the beginning of the hunt. Over 110 were killed during the hunt and another 100 were removed via vehicle kills, poaching, illegal shooting, DNR Depredation solutions, and WI NOTORIOUS “SHOOT SHOVEL AND SHUT UP” Policy that is being bragged about on facebook by over 100 hunters on a private Facebook page. Gray wolf should NOT be the target of training packs of hounds during their Denning and whelping time and if this happens it will result in MORE lost animals. Your ill thought out jammed through legislation may because of the NATURE of the Gray and their pack structure (killing the Alpha hunters can take out a whole pack during winter kill) eliminate the Gray Wolf from our state entirely after more than 25 years to bring them back. You are also not considering the fact that CWD was not IN the Northwestern part of our state, but with removing the NATURAL SELECTIVE PREDITOR of a sick White tail, you are compounding the CWD issue. The DNR’s previous policy of killing as many deer as possible did not reduce the percentage of CWD animals at all. RELIST the GRAY WOLF on WI Protected Species list, STOP THE HUNT, and ABSOLUTELY NO HOUNDS HUNTING NOR TRAINING NOR TRACKING GRAY WOLVES IN WI. WI wildlife belongs to ALL of the WI resdients not just the ones that buy hunting licenses. We both have fishing licenses as well. WE DO CONTRIBUTE, and should have a SAY, and be LISTENED TO.
Jose Angel Gonzalez
Merri Ann Gonzalez

I am very against the use of dogs hunting wolves, and also hunting and trapping and poisoning of wolves. The wolves should be put on the endangered species again, and this time no more hunting, trapping, or poisoning of them , killing and torturing is not a sport.

I was told that one of the main reasons for Wisconsin’s bloodthirsty Wolf hunt was in response to complaints by hunters who stated that they were losing their expensive bear dogs to wolves. If they are losing their dogs to wolves while hunting and training for bears, what in the hell do they think will happen when they use dogs to hunt wolves. How completely ignorant is that. And I would also ask to see proof that dogs are beng lost to wolves. I have lived my whole life in Wisconsin and was consistantly told be farmers and hunters that if they see a dog in the woods, no matter what type, that THEY shoot and kill them. They always said that was because the dogs become feral and chase deer or form packs and attack livestock. So what proof is there that it is the wolf population that is responsible for these supposed attacks and not wild dog packs. Every year people in Wisconsin and many from Illinois dump their unwanted dogs in our forests because they are too cheap to bring them to a humane society. So who has proof that it is not farmers or hunters who are responsible for the so-called loss of bear dogs if they are seen running in the woods. How can the state justify the expense of restocking Wisconsin’s wolf population from total extinction to several hundred and then turn around and possibly drive them back to extinction again for the fun of a few hunters and trappers. It is bad enough that you are again slaughtering wolves, but you now want to permit the slaughter of dogs being trained to hurt and fight wolves. You people are truly sick and it makes me ashamed to be a life long resident of Wisconsin.